Ayisha vs Avaran Kutty Advocate - MOOSAKUTTY, Noufal — 309/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26(7)(1). Status: Call with IA. Next hearing: 19th June 2026.

Call with IA Next hearing 19-Jun-2026 this date has passed

OS - ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KLML130012032025

Filing Number

770/2025

Filing Date

07-Nov-2025

Registration No

309/2025

Registration Date

07-Nov-2025

Court

Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court

Judge

1-Munsiff Magistrate

Last updated 19-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 26(7)(1)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Ayisha

    Adv. ARSHAD AYYOOB K H

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Avaran Kutty Advocate - MOOSAKUTTY, Noufal

  2. 2.Musthafa

    Adv. MOOSAKUTTY,Noufal

  3. 3.KunjiMuhammed

    Adv. MOOSAKUTTY,Noufal

Case History

  1. 19-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    Call with IA

    Munsiff Magistrate

  3. 17-Dec-2025

    Written Statement

    Munsiff Magistrate

  4. 16-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 07-Nov-2025

    OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: The Court of the Munsiff, Tirur granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of petitioner Ayisha against respondents Avarankutty, Musthafa, and Kunhimuhammed in a property boundary dispute. Both parties are directed to maintain status quo regarding the petition schedule property boundaries as determined by the commissioner until the next hearing. Notice has been issued to the respondents, and the petitioner must comply with Order 39 Rule 3(a) & (b) of the Civil Procedure Code. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  6. 07-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 309/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The Court of the Munsiff, Tirur granted an ad-interim injunction in favor of petitioner Ayisha against respondents Avarankutty, Musthafa, and Kunhimuhammed in a property boundary dispute. Both parties are directed to maintain status quo regarding the petition schedule property boundaries as determined by the commissioner until the next hearing. Notice has been issued to the respondents, and the petitioner must comply with Order 39 Rule 3(a) & (b) of the Civil Procedure Code. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case